History is about the present and that is why every generation writes it anew, American writer Edgar Lawrence Doctorow once said. It is certainly true when it comes to Tibet, where history is never just a subject of academic interest, but a focal point of intense political debates as to whether the Himalayan plateau should be considered 'an integral part of China'.
Over the past century, historians from both camps as well as those from the west have ploughed through literature and documents to support their claims.
The subject is so politicised that the answers are often far from objective and sometimes emotional.
The questions concern not only the historical territorial integrity of China - one of the core issues on which Beijing will never compromise - but also the prospect of resolving recurring conflicts over Tibet's political status.
Many argue that these unresolved historical questions, combined with economic factors, fuelled the riots that erupted in Tibetan-populated areas last year.
Behind this question of Tibet's history is the issue of Beijing's future legitimacy in the predominantly Buddhist region, a key reason the ongoing negotiations were not leading anywhere, historians say.
In 1979, the Dalai Lama and his government-in-exile adopted what they regard as the 'middle way' approach - trading claims of independence for political autonomy for Tibetan areas.
